Concerning Myths

Following up with my previous post, the authority of the Bible is often questioned when other studies come along with various hypothesis. People come to the facts and interpret them due to their starting points. For example, evolutionists say the fossil layer proves that the earth is billions of years old, while creationists say that the fossil layer proves that a universal flood took place on the earth. Obviously, archaeology is no exception to these diverse interpretations of new discoveries.

Several ancient texts of the Ancient Near East, referred to as the ANE, have been discovered due to archaeology. Examples of the popular names of these literatures are Hammurabi’s Code, the Gilgamesh Epic and the Sumerian and Babylonian King Lists. Many people have struggled with the recovering of old accounts of tales and myths within these texts that contain similarities to the Biblical narratives in the Old Testament. According to David Livingstone in Correlating the Texts of Ancient Literature with the Old Testament, people have generally approached these issues with three different premises:

1.      That the Bible, particularly the Pentateuch, the first five books of the Bible, contain much “myth” and legend, just like the other accounts that have been discovered.

2.      That the Israelites were influenced by the religions of neighboring countries and therefore, created their own religion based upon those others.

3.      That the Old Testament, particularly again the Pentateuch, was written by unauthentic authors at a later date, during the kingdom of Israel or perhaps even later.

In particular, a popular Christian apologist once struggled with these same kinds of troubling issues. C.S. Lewis (known for authoring several books, some of which the recent films Chronicles of Narnia are based off of) followed the writings of James Frazer and Joseph Campbell, who both advocated that the Biblical accounts, particularly the virgin birth, atonement and resurrection, were all irrational beliefs based upon myths. They researched and emphasized that nearly every ancient culture contained similarities with the Bible where a god, or demigod died and rose again. However, Lewis began to see the Biblical account in a different light due to the advice of his friend J.R.R. Tolkien (known for his works such as The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings Trilogy). God fulfilled the chief desires of the pre-Christian pagan world; He appealed to more than just reason, but also to our imaginations. Furthermore, Christianity is set apart because its historicity has been proven! Now I realize that Lewis is primarily commenting concerning the New Testament, but as Louis Markos, author of Apologetics for the 21^st Century states: “Christians need not insist that Christianity is the only truth; we should expect to find truth in every culture and religion.” He offers a parallel to Lewis’ argument in the flood account in the Epic of Gilgamesh and the Genesis flood. [Markos, Louis, and C. S. Lewis. "7—More than Balder, Not Less: C. S. Lewis and the Apologetics of Myth." InApologetics for the twenty-first century, 65-72. Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway, 2010.]

              With that being said, I would like to end on what Livingstone from earlier refers to as “A Better Way.” He suggests that we begin with a completely different premise than the three previously mentioned: that the Bible is a completely true account, divinely inspired book. He admits that to do this, presuppositions are obviously present, but that those must be proven with facts and until done so, should be held “somewhat lightly.” Building upon this, he offers six hypotheses that he feels will be sufficiently supported by facts:

1.      The ANE texts that we have discovered are not equivalent to the source material of the Bible.

2.      The Bible is not a collection of myths, but rather historical facts.

3.      The ANE texts were not “evolved” but were “fabricated religio-politico” accounts that were intended to serve a specific function.  

4.      The Israelite’s religion was antithetic to the various religions magnified in the ANE literatures.

5.      The purposes of the Bible and the ANE literature were different; Genesis showed how the religion revolving around Jehovah God came about.

6.      The Bible and the ANE literature basically come down to one major issue: “Who will control men and the world?”

I found these hypotheses to be interesting and helpful in setting the groundwork for interpreting archaeological discoveries from a Christian worldview. I think it is important to remember that we cannot use archaeology as a source of proving the Bible. On the other hand, similarities in recent finds should not be a cause to say that the Bible is not true either; we should not be surprised!